Identifying and Advocating Best Practices in the Criminal Justice System. A Texas-Centric Examination of Current Conditions, Reform Initiatives, and Emerging Issues with a Special Emphasis on Capital Punishment.

Tuesday, 25 June 2013

Colorado's Continuing Debate

Much criticism has been levied against
Gov. John Hickenlooper's decision to grant a reprieve to Nathan Dunlap,
preventing him from being executed this summer. Some have accused the
governor of usurping the role of the jury and the courts. Others have
attacked him for elevating his personal opposition to the death penalty
above the law of the state and the wishes of some of Dunlap's victims'
families.

These challenges fundamentally misunderstand the
governor's constitutional power to grant clemency, pardon and reprieve.
They also ignore the governor's stated reasons for staying Dunlap's
execution.

Since 1876, the Colorado Constitution has bestowed on
our state's governor the power to grant commutations, pardons and
reprieves. All states bestow this power on an executive entity, either
the governor, a board, or a combination of the two. The U.S.
Constitution grants similar power to the president, who may grant
pardons, commutations and reprieves to those convicted of federal
crimes.

Gov. Bill Owens used his commutation and pardon power 14
times during his administration. Gov. Bill Ritter issued 29 pardons and
commutations, including the posthumous pardon of Joe Arridy, a
developmentally disabled man who was wrongfully convicted, sentenced to
death, and executed in the 1930s.

The executive clemency power
plays an equal role in the criminal justice process to that of the judge
and jury. It allows the governor to consider a broad array of
information, including evidence that was — for whatever reason —
unavailable to the jury at the time of trial, and information about the
individual's conduct in the years since his trial. It also allows the
governor to take into account factors beyond the individual
circumstances of a particular case, such as evidence of systemic
problems or changing societal attitudes.

And:

Further, since the DOC finally started treating Dunlap's illness in 2006 — 10 years after his trial — he has stopped cycling through mania and psychosis and has been able to express his profound remorse for his crimes.

None of this information, about Dunlap or about Colorado's death penalty was available to the jury that sentenced him to die. It is, however, squarely within the governor's consideration under Article IV, Section 7 of the Colorado Constitution. By exercising his constitutional power, the governor has afforded all of us an opportunity to carefully reassess the fairness of the ultimate punishment.

Comments

The comments to this entry are closed.

The StandDown Texas Project

The StandDown Texas Project was organized in 2000 to advocate a moratorium on executions and a state-sponsored review of Texas' application of the death penalty.
To stand down is to go off duty temporarily, especially to review safety procedures.

Steve Hall

Project Director Steve Hall was chief of staff to the Attorney General of Texas from 1983-1991; he was an administrator of the Texas Resource Center from 1993-1995. He has worked for the U.S. Congress and several Texas legislators. Hall is a former journalist.